The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

In a piece entitled “A Primer on Japan for Caroline Kennedy” in the August 12 Wall Street Journal, Michael Auslin of the American Enterprise Institute, declaims that, with Beijing’s

Caroline Kennedy (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“intimidating tactics” on the rise, “there is a good chance that [prospective Ambassador Kennedy’s] tenure will see some type of military confrontation between Japan and China,”...and, “as Japan’s only full treaty partner, America would be drawn into any conflict that breaks out...”

Noting that U.S.-Japan relations face “numerous challenges” and that Japan’s foreign policy is “bedeviled” by disputes with virtually all its neighbors, “Tokyo is nervous about any signs that Washington’s commitment to Japan is wavering.” Thus, he says, Kennedy will “have to reassure Tokyo of America’s role in Asia even as U.S. military budgets continue to decline.” At the same time, she will be “the point person for ensuring that [Japan prime minister] Abe’s government implements agreement to realign U.S. forces in Japan, particularly U.S. Marines on Okinawa.”

Anticipating Kennedy’s confirmation hearings, Auslin writes that “senate questioners will probe her understanding of the threats facing Japan and the constraints on America’s presence in the Pacific.” He proffers that “she can comfort observers in both Washington and Tokyo by showing appreciation for Japan’s unique role in hosting U.S. forces and providing public goods in Asia.” Furthermore, she can “show seriousness” by addressing the weaknesses in the alliance....”

There is much more in Auslin’s piece to suggest that he, while representing well the Washington defense establishment and status quo-defending views of AEI, hardly deserves his perch as an Asian foreign policy commentator for the WSJ. But the main problem--and it is a daunting and depressing one--is that 95% of readers probably found it all too reasonable, balanced, and constructive.

Here, then, in a sincere effort to give Caroline Kennedy the advice she really needs to perform her ambassadorial duties with distinction, I offer a “Real Primer on Japan” for Ambassador-designate Caroline Kennedy.

For the Eyes of Ambassador-designate Kennedy Only:

To begin, it helps no one, least of all you, to assume that you yet fully understand your ambassadorial role. Please never forget, it is the pursuit and advancement of U.S. national interests, and above all vital national interests--those that would justify unleashing the unspeakable horrors of modern war--that should inform everything you will do in Tokyo, and the analysis of U.S. interests in Japan and Asia that you provide to policy makers in Washington, especially President Obama.

Try to understand what Michael Auslin was saying and representing in his WSJ Op/Ed. Expect more of the same from bloviating senators at your confirmation hearings. Question it. They represent entrenched U.S. foreign policy and, especially, defense establishment interests (just looking at so-called “think tanks,” besides AEI, there are CSIS, Brookings, and Carnegie, with only the Institute providing a soberly thoughtful alternative view)--and are pushing on you their agenda, claiming that it is moderate, balanced, and undebatable: maintaining the Post WWII/Cold War geostrategic order in East Asia of which the foundation is unchallengeable U.S. military supremacy on the seas and in the air achieved through military bases in Japan and manipulation of Japan’s internal politics.

Beware further of those, including Auslin and AEI, who counsel that you should use your personal celebrity and charisma to assuage Japanese “nervousness” that change may be in the air; that, rather, your goal should be to enhance good feeling in the way most congenial to Japanese: promise not to change.

Be especially vigilant against arguments that your use your access in Washington to lobby against U.S.-origin threats to the status quo, like cuts in defense spending, voices like those of Cato, or top-secret memos from within the NSC that question whether U.S. strategic interests are being served by drawing lines in the sand and fueling an arms race in the region, while U.S. vital interests are nowhere at stake.

Steel yourself to suspect often sincerely intended offers of friendship and cultured association when--as will often be the case--an ulterior motive is to induce you intellectually and emotionally, as well as symbolically as ambassador, to become a spokesperson for the Japanese establishment’s perception of its interests.

Not a professional in diplomacy, and naturally appreciative of the marvels of Japanese culture and civilization, you are vulnerable to losing objectivity and to be becoming a defender of what you are led to believe are Japan’s interests, particularly when you are constantly advised--as in Auslin’s piece--that U.S. and Japanese interests are easily congruent, being essentially “containment” of China.

A realpolitik analysis is that interests of the U.S. and Japan are aligned, but the alignment exists not in the status quo but in a new security and political order in Asia the foundation of which must be a sustainable and mutually acceptable U.S.-China strategic relationship (see my previous post).